Pages

Wednesday, September 29, 2010

Any parent who values ideals like honor works to pass their good name down to their children. We all hope our children will carefully treat the good name we try to pass to them. Sometimes, that hope is badly disappointed.

Consider the name of Lewinsky. Now it is the punch-line in any number of dirty jokes, as is "Clinton". Lewinsky is used as a substitute for a sex act (as in "getting a Lewinsky").

A new family name...Stark...has to be added to this kind of roll of dishonorable use. Getting ""Starked" is synonymous with being the victim of a politically-motivated lie, launched by an obscure Collectivist blogger type, which is then picked up by the MSM.

The most recent person Starked was John Boehner, Minority Leader of the House. Starking requires no hint of truth, and there appears to be none at the base of the Boehner "not-scandal" non-story. But it DID get into the MSM, and that's another aspect of this story. But first, a little more on the man who has made his family name a hiss and by-word. This is him, writing at The Daily Kos:

I've just returned to home base.

I've got video of O'Reilly in his sleepwear (red shorts and a white t-shirt). I delivered the Andrea Mackris Court filings to all of his neighors [sic] - every home in his development got a copy. And I put a bunch of signs up along his street - "Bill O'Reilly: Andrea Mackris has your cash" directly across from his house; "Bill O'Reilly: PERVERT" in front of his home; "Bill O'Reilly: CHEATER" on the road he must take to exit his development and "Bill O'Reilly: Can't be trusted with your daughters" at the landmark boulder marking the entrance to his development.

One wonders how he treated the far slimier Bill Clinton. Very likely, if he ever did anything around Clinton, it was give him a big Lewinsky (figuratively). See, Mr. Clinton is a Collectivist icon, and politics are all that matters to a man like Mike Stark. Again, truth is a complete non-issue to Collectivists.

As is consistency; we were told for years that sex is a personal matter, and nobody's business. Of course, that was the lie told concurrent with the one about "this is all about sex...nothing but a (Lewinsky) in the Oval Office", when what it was ALWAYS about was perjury, obstruction of justice, and malfeasance in office. So, we are now told, as a continuation of the lie, that the Collective is just exposing the hypocrisy of the not-Collective. Amazing, whenever you see it.

Which leads us to the self-vaunted MSM, which we are told by various scolds should be filtering out all that excess information out there, limiting free speech to that which is good for us. Only professionals can ascertain true stuff from false stuff. Except not so much. The New York Post ran with a Boehner story, the progeny of Starking, although one that featured denials by all involved in the suggested affair.

One final observation or two: as a trial lawyer, I can say anything about people in a case, and I have complete immunity from any consequence. But that is never something I abuse, or even take advantage of...if I say it, I have ample reason to believe it to be true. I respect people and their reputations, and I guard my own integrity. Now, consider the haters of the Collective who do neither.

How lower than a serpent's belly is a slug like Mike Stark who does not hesitate to do what even trial lawyers will not do, and how ashamed must be his parents, who have seen their family name become a new term for a slimy lie...STARKING.

Tuesday, September 28, 2010

May his red-nosed rotund-roundness rest in peace, Rodney Dangerfield said, "Itellya, kids today got no respect. I asked my kid, 'What are you, ignorant, or just apathetic?' So he says, 'I don't know, and I don't care.'"

Heh. Funny, but inaccurate. It appears the reality is that kids today don't know much, but they really, really care. Unsettling studies from the Intercollegiate Studies Institute found that kids graduating from some of the top schools in the country don't know much about history, civics or government, but have some very strong opinions about the matter.

First sheesh-worthy item on the menu: On the left are the top ten schools rated by what percentage civic literacy "improved" at graduation over their score on the same test their Freshman year. OK, fair enough. Now, on the right are the bottom ten. Do not attempt to adjust your monitor - The cognitive disjunction you are experiencing is due to the fact that these egghead-educrat-rugrats actually know less about American history, government and civics at graduation than they did when they started! And these are top schools.

If you read the results at their site - you'll find these same kids have much stronger opinions - mostly about social issues - and a much lower estimation of the United States as a whole than when they were green little preppies.

The ISI study has a civic literacy test you can take here, if you're so inclined. I scored 93, and missed at least one question because I was rushing through and misread it. Not bragging in the least. This quiz is like "see spot run" level. Here is the average report card across the country.

A few more troubling tidbits from ISI and PEW research:

Less than half of Americans can identify the three branches of Government.

Less than half can name the House Speaker of Senate President

Less than half know which party has the majority in the House or Senate

Less than half can identify where "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" comes from.

Only 8% could not identify the winners of Dancing with the Stars for the last four seasons.

OK, I made up the last one, but I'd bet a dollar to a dog dropping its close!

Did you say yowza!?! Agreed. We're dealing with some politically illiterate folks here. None of which would rate a blink and a burp, except for one very huge problem - these folks not only vote, they are the ones who decide elections. Here's the spectrum of all us US-type folks as of last year - so grant that this is leaning further right at present.

Is there not a huge problem here? All those folks in the middleish part of the bell curve don't know what's going on - but they really "care". They can be - and are - enticed either right or left, depending upon who is the Hopey Changiest, who can wow a crowd with a teleprompter and who's the slickest looking guy on the market. I don't think this is being cynical in the least. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong, because I'd like to be wrong here. This is also the 2010 lb gorrilla in the room that the pundits and Conservo-blogo-screamers are not seeing.

Perhaps an illustration of the phenom might be good old WSJ opinionator Peggy Noonan. You may recall when she went from working for Dan Rather (who she respected and admired, and still does), to writing speeches for Ronald Reagan, then Bush 41. She is most noted for writing Reagan's Normandy address for the D-Day anniversary, and the Challenger Disaster speech - which has been dubbed one of the top ten speeches of all time. Somewhat less known is that she is the mother of Bush's "Kinder, gentler nation"..."1000 points of light" (still can't figure that one out) - and the ever notorious, "Read my lips, no new taxes." She wrote a very interesting and readable book about her time in the Reagan White House, "What I saw at the Revolution." But Noonan was not enamored with Reagan because of his conservative values, but his charisma, character, leadership and his general bigger-than-life persona. Strangely, this is the same reason she bought into the Hopey/Changey leg tingle.

In January '09 she wrote, "What I Saw at the Inauguration", a sunshine, lollypops and rainbows piece about the dawning of the, like, awesome new HopenChange - and stealing the name from her Reagan book

We left on time and as we taxied onto the runway the pilot came on. "This is the USAir 4 p.m. shuttle to Washington, D.C.," he said in the old-fashioned Chuck Yeager style, and from the back of the plane came a roar of cheers and applause. When the sound reached the cockpit, the pilot came on again. "Hope has come to America," he said. The plane went wild. The whole experience the next few days was marked for me by a new or refreshed knowledge that those who had not felt included or invited in the past were now for the first time truly here, and part of it all, in great numbers. And I suppose the fact that this would never have come about without the support, the votes, of the traditionally invited and included gave a special air of inclusiveness to the event. There was great kindness between people and true friendliness. No one was different. Everyone, whatever their views or votes, was happy.

But as of this summer no mo tingle, no mo hope, no mo love, the thrill is gone."He Was Supposed to Be Competent""The president, in my view, continues to govern in a way that suggests he is chronically detached from the central and immediate concerns of his countrymen."- and a long accompanying rant along the same lines.

Bottom line: Peggy Noodlehead voted for Ronald Reagan and Barack Obama - and here's the brain bender - for exactly the same reason. She likes Charisma and charm - and she can not differentiate between "Morning in America" and "Hope and Change/Yes We Can."Nor could she discern that the former was born of character and integrity and the latter a Sham Wow pitchman.I would submit the majority of voters in this country are in the same politically challenged boat - which could put us up a creek without a paddle.

Sunday, September 26, 2010

A bunch of out-in-the-open Collectivists will soon converge on Washington, DC, but this time it isn't Obama and his cabinet coming to work, or the Holder DoJ coming to town for a conference.

And, as I've noted before, it is good to have these despisers of America at least showing their true colors, rather than the false flag they usually employ during political seasons.

You see, on October 2, a gathering of the Collective has been called. The NAACP, AFL-CIO, Service Employees International Union, La Raza, the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, the American Federation of Teachers, the Rainbow Push Coalition, the Campaign for America's Future...they'll all be there (or people they hire to attend will be). You can also count the various Communist and Marxist groups in America in, along with Code Pink, and the rest of the Collective...the environmental groups, the peace groups, Hollywood pretty much en masse, and various other "artists" and celebrities.

This little march is being called "One Nation Working Together", which is an obvious lie...but no matter. The whole purpose is to show strength and, as Little Dick Trumka gently put it,"demand a renewed focus and investment in people." "Investment" by government, of course, and with your money, of course. Oh, and that of your children for generations, too!

The poor old Lincoln Memorial and adjoining mall will be the site of this convocation. Of course, Lincoln the man would spit on people who, like Jealous and Trumka, eat the bread of labor while they fuel the fires of racial division and class warfare in America. In fact, this could be the largest gathering of racist and hate groups in American history.

It will be interesting to see how many people show up, how they behave, and how the place is left when they leave. Especially since we have such a recent comparison from the Restoring Honor rally just weeks before. The rest of America...the part that isn't One Collective Working Together...will be watching to see who our enemies are.

Friday, September 24, 2010

David Axlerod was supposed to be having a nice, romantic conversation with the moonbattery. He was going to tell them how they should starch the Obamic shirts, and clean the floors. They got snippy, though, and he had to show them who was the man of the house.

"You play a great role in informing people about the stakes of elections," Axelrod told the bloggers. "One of the reasons I was eager to expend time was to enlist you."

He can talk so sweetly when he wants something... And normally, they are like putty.

And he was spending his precious time with them...which is what they longed for most of all. He was telling them how important they were, and how he needed them.

But at least one of the moonbat brides got out of line:

That tension burst out into the open when [Susan Madrak of Crooks and Liars] directly asked Axelrod: "Have you ever heard of hippie punching?" That prompted a long silence from Axelrod.

"You want us to help you, the first thing I would suggest is enough of the hippie punching," Madrak added. "We’re the girl you’ll take under the bleachers but you won’t be seen with in the light of day."

Financial hard times strain most relationships…especially family relationships. The Obami and their brides in the Collectivist intelligentsia (or UN-intelligentsia more aptly) are finding their honeymoon period long over. That magic person who they just knew would know their needs and desires instinctively, and would bring them their rainbows and unicorns has proven to be…less than even an ordinary guy.

He’s not pure. Hell, a lot of the time, he’s NOT THERE…even when he’s in the room. And worst of all, he’s abusing his little brides the same way that pig/Nazi/chimp/moron used to abuse them. It’s like they just traded one guy for the next abuser. And, OF COURSE, they defend him from critics…that’s what the submissive spouse does. Oh, he says the right things, and he DOES loath the America they loath, but he leaves them for those pneumatic blonds of big business. And he never takes them anywhere anymore. It's like he's too cool to be seen with them. They feel...just so used.

He’s a pig, just like all of them…worse, in fact. He’ll tell his little brides anything to make them stay. And they will. He’s all they have, and they’re afraid.

Thursday, September 23, 2010

Ah, for those heady days when counter culture icon Pete Seeger sang of the unions' epic struggle for Joe Blow Proletariat against the evil corporate monster. There was indeed a day when unions were necessary to protect workers' rights, but what the labor movement has evolved into is in large measure nothing more or less than a racket.

In the present administration, unions have found a new strength in their good buddy in Washington, and though at present unions represent only 12% of the workforce, they wield massive influence in government.

You may remember the Chrysler bailout to the tune of $6 billion - most of which went to subsidize union labor at the expense of non union shops. (See Michelle Malkins Delphi Disaster) Here's your tax dollars at work courtesy of United Auto Workers:

"Oh Yeah!! There ain't no party like a Deeeetroit party!!""Hey guys, hate to be a buzz kill, but shouldn't you be building cars?...You know the government spent a lot of money bailing you out..." [Exit auto workers - Tires squeeling, smoke] "You goin back to the factory?..."

Government employment is another story. The massive expansion of government jobs come with huge perks, courtesy of unions that control 40% of the government workforce. What can these unions do for you? Pick your pocket and put it in theirs.

"President Obama is presiding over the largest federal work force in decades. In the current fiscal year, the number of civilian workers will grow by 153,000, to 1.43 million. These are the only jobs Mr. Obama can legitimately claim to have created. Unfortunately, they are subsidized by deficit spending.

Federal positions are not shovel-ready make-work jobs, either. Working for Uncle Sam pays extremely well these days. Government employment used to be a calling, a career in which a sense of fulfillment from public service offset low pay and spartan working conditions. Not so today. According to a study by the Cato Institute, 2008 federal worker pay-and-benefits packages averaged $119,982. That's more than double the private-sector average of $59,909."

Unions, particularly the SEIU are also lobbying hard for immigration reform. More Latinos = more Democrat ballots.

Seems I was just lamenting the absence of a GOP “manifesto” one might use to determine what “Republican Values” actually are in the bold new age of HopenChange. Well, fasten your seatbelt and pull out the barf bag from the seat pocket in front of you…we may hit turbulence.

In a stunning demonstration of brilliant timing, the Grand Old Party is finally rolling out its long awaited manifesto – immediately following the stunningly stupid Murkowski Meltdown – and that on the heels of the O’Donnell/Rove-rage. See, the thing you want to do, of course, is flagrantly demonstrate Washingtoon establishment business-as-usual-party-politics and a reality challenged disconnect with voters (not to mention common sense) – then immediately announce to them that you are the great Hope to Change all of that!

It is, in my view, a partisan hacksheet of patriotic pablum, flowered up with quotes from everyone from Reagan to Kennedy to…Margaret Thatcher(?) Following a rather tedious attempt in the intro/forward to portray an epic historical document, the main text covers six promising looking, (if somewhat vague) conservative themes:

* A Plan to Create Jobs, End Economic Uncertainty, and Make America More Competitive* A Plan to Stop Out-of-Control Spending and Reduce the Size of Government* A Plan to Repeal and Replace the Government Takeover of Healthcare* A Plan to Reform Congress and Restore Trust* A Plan to Keep Our Nation Secure at Home and Abroad* Checks and Balances

Sadly, it then fails to clearly define them and falls far short in proposing specific goals, means or timetables to achieve them. The hard reality is that assuming Republicans gain at least a House majority, it would be difficult to impossible to achieve significant headway on this agenda. Moreover, the Republican “leadership” lacks leadership dynamic – i.e. the gravitas, credibility, continuity and commitment to make it happen. And I can't help wondering if the GOP RINO/"moderate" faction really embraces this, or if it's window dressing to appease the Tea Party before the elections.

I suppose my obvious disillusionment with this revelation comes from a healthy dose of cynicism toward these people who were hardly fiscally conservative when they had the majority and the White House - and perhaps a naive hope that something might come along to clearly define, revive and unify conservative values in the GOP. Sorry, I just don't think this is it. Here you go--

Wednesday, September 22, 2010

Stupid, stupid, stupid... There is no excuse for this. The GOP, if they wanted to hack off conservatives, could not have done anything these days that would better do it.

In a rare triumph for Senate traditionalists in this anti-establishment year, Republicans Wednesday decided not to punish Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R., Alaska) by stripping her of a powerful committee post.

Senate Republicans, angered by Murkowski’s decision to run for re-election as a write-in candidate after losing the Republican primary, met behind closed doors to consider demoting her from her post as top Republican on the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, a prized perch for her resource-rich state.

But with the committee unlikely to conduct any further business this year and the act seen as largely symbolic, Republicans decided not to add insult to her injury at the hands of Joe Miller, the tea party-backed candidate who beat her in the primary.

“We all respect the system, and she still is a Republican senator,’’ said Sen. Orrin Hatch (R., Utah.) after the closed party caucus. “It’s just a matter of good taste. We decided to keep the status quo as long as she’s a senator.’’

The conservatives of America are not in the mood for doily dipping, patty-finger conduct. Murky SHOULD have been hammered, losing her POWER and prestige in the Senate. Instead, she stays as a defense of the "status quo". If there is one thing that the GOP should understand, the status quo...business as usual...WILL NOT DO.

Barbara "Don't Call Me Ma'am" Boxer is in the political fight of her life in Kulhefornia. She is using her power as a Senator to bring home an extra slab of pork, and to hell with national security, the counsel of the military, or the even the Obama regime.

"We have to not underspend and not overspend, because there can be wasteful spending in any area. We want to make sure that we have the funds to meet the threats that we face and that's always dictated the budgets that I've supported."

The problem there is that Boxer is lying.

Boeing has a big operation in Kulhefornia. It employs LOTS of high-paid, unionized folks who build a very fine product...that the military does not need and cannot economically use. In fact, if Boxer DOES manage to force the Air Force to purchase the planes she's pushing, the PURCHASE price of the planes would only be the beginning. The end would be grounding other aircraft that are MORE capable and MORE economical to operate. That hurts national security.

The Boeing-build C-17 is a fine aircraft. It is essentially a flying boxcar...a logistical airlift asset. The problem is that the Air Force has enough of them...maybe too many...at present. They have said...REPEATEDLY...they don't want any more, and they've explained why.

Boxer is NOT one to listen to the military when pork is on the line, particularly when she's in a dead-heat election race with a tough Carly Fiorina. She won't even listen to the Obama regime, which has backed the Air Force in rejecting the procurement of more planes that are not needed.

Like the C-17, the C-5 is a flying boxcar...only BIGGER. We own them now, and they are just ending a major modification to make them better and more durable then ever. It is kind of a law in transport that a BIGGER prime mover is a MORE ECONOMICAL prime mover, and that is true of the C-5.

Think of the C-17 as a medium truck and the C-5 as an 18-wheeler. The medium truck certainly has its uses, but on a per ton basis cannot move cargo as economically as the bigger truck.

Bottom line: Boxer is insisting on the boondoggle purchase of a bunch of boxcars that actually hurt national security. The sole reason is to procure pork for the folks back home, with the end in mind of greasing her return to power in the Senate. That, all by itself, is enough to disqualify Boxer as a Senator.

Tuesday, September 21, 2010

Larry Summers was ONE of the very few people close to Obama who COULD have been a moderating influence on Obama's pure Collective dogma. Now he's on his way out the door.

Summers was one of the FEW people in the regime who actually was not a doctrinaire Collectivist. He had been in the (nominally) private sector, and he DID (at least at points) understand economics.

But the debates [over monetary policy] take place within the context of nearly total agreement on some basics: Monetary policy can shape an economy more than budgetary policy can; extended high inflation will not lead to prosperity and can lead to lower living standards; policy makers cannot fine-tune their economies as they fluctuate.

While much of his academic work was directed at monetary policy, Mr. [Milton] Friedman’s great popular contribution lay elsewhere: in convincing people of the importance of allowing free markets to operate.

He WAS one of the few people who COULD provide a moderating influence on Obama...who could teach THE ONE some economics.

In reality, though, my understanding is that people like Valorie Jarrett had MUCH more influence on The Mad King Barack than the Summers types.

Unless the fool in question is a delusional, egomanical, self-aggrandizing old fool like Jemma Caarta OR his enablers in the MSM.

In one of the MOST amazing developments in an amazing political season, Jimmy Carter's latest stab at rehabilitation is certainly up there in terms of chutzpa, if nothing else.

Asked by NBC's Brian Williams to explain the photo of Carter with the other living Presidents, this is how the weird back-patting developed:

BRIAN WILLIAMS: The last photo of you with your-- fellow former presidents, you were well off to the side on the right. And I thought to myself, well, there's-- there's a possible metaphor. What is it-- about you, you think, the way you've-- decided to conduct your life and post-presidency? Do you feel listened to? Do you feel-- that you receive your due? Or do you feel, in fact, apart from the crowd?

MR. CARTER: "I feel thatmy role as a former president is probably superior to that of other presidents. Primarily because of the activism and the -- and the injection of working at the Carter Center and in international affairs, and to some degree, domestic affairs, on energy conservation, on -- on environment, and things of that kind. We're right in the midst of the -- of the constant daily debate. And -- and -- and the Carter Center has decided, under my leadership, to fill vacuums in the world. When -- when the United States won't deal with troubled areas, we go there and we meet with leaders who can bring an end to a conflict, or an end to a human rights abuse, and so forth. So I -- I feel that have an advantage over many other former presidents in being involved in daily affairs that have shaped the policies of our nation and the world." [My emphasis]

When I think of Carter and his international "work", I think of his flabbergasting support for dictators and election abuse, for his incomprehensible anti-semitism and friendliness with terrorists, and for his FAILURES to support human rights fighters and unflagging acceptance of human rights abuse.

Carter CHOSE to lay a wreath on the grave of Yassir Arafat, warmly embracing the Hamas leadership on the same trip.

There is simply no tie to reality in Carter's "CarterCare" claim made on seeBS. It is simply bizarre.

"The fact is that we would have had comprehensive health care now had it not been for Ted Kennedy's deliberately blocking the legislation that I proposed."

How does one provoke, enrage and/or gravely insult a conservative these days? You may try…

“You’re a racist homophobic Islamophobic nativist Neanderthal!”Nope.“You’re an idiot!”Nothing.“You’re insane?”Blink.“You’re a Nazi!”Please.“You’re a piece of s#!t!”Yaaaaawn.“Yo mama’s a ho!”Whatever.“You’re a RINO!”WTF are you talking about, punk? Who the %$&* are you? You’re a friggin Marxist compared to me so STFU and GFYS!

Ah, yes, the RINO card that reduces the recipient to a level somewhere between fungus and insect, negating any subsequent proposition he may make – effectively ending the dispute in favor of the one hurling said trendy epithet.

So…what exactly is a RINO, I asks meself? Then I answers, typically, the answer boils down to, “I know one when I see one” (McCain of course being the Gold Standard) By definition, “Republican in Name Only” is a pejorative term refering to a member of the Republican Party whose views or actions are perceived as insufficiently conforming to “Republican Values.” Ah, but therein lies the rub. What are “Republican Values?” That used to mean “conservative values”, but in the post Bushian – New & Improved – One Big Size Tent Fits All GOP, it seems the values have gotten a bit – shall we say – scoza-fuzzy? So in a real sense, a true conservative would in fact be the RINO. And an Indy registered conservative like myself is not Republican of any flavor.

Not to worry, as of last February, “a group of more than 80 prominent conservative thinkers are set to unveil their version of a mission statement for the right.” But so far, nada. Ok, here we go, (Aug 30) “Boehner said the long-awaited Republican manifesto, detailing the policies the GOP would pursue if they win back control of the House or Senate, would be released shortly after lawmakers return to Washington.”Still nothing...

If they had the sense God gave a coconut, they might consider another “Republican Manifesto” crafted under very similar circumstances. Josiah Bailey was a freshman Senator for NC in 1930, and for the most part was unable to resist FDR’s New Deal monster from growing. But by his second term, the already anemic economy hit a recession, and partisan lines blurred. America had had it with the “Raw Deal”. Baily and a bi-partisan group worked on a Republican Manifesto, (in secret as FDR was well known for heavy handed retribution toward opponents) and rolled it out in 1937. You can’t tell me this, with a few tweaks, isn’t exactly what we need. Now.

1. Immediate revision of taxes on capital gains and undistributed profits in order to free investment funds.
2. Reduced expenditures to achieve a balanced budget, and thus, to still fears deterring business expansion.
3. An end to coercion and violence in relations between capital and labor.
4. Opposition to “unnecessary” government competition with private enterprise.
5. Recognition that private investment and enterprise require a reasonable profit.
6. Safeguarding the collateral upon which credit rests.
7. Reduction of taxes, or if this proved impossible at the moment, firm assurance of no further increases.
8. Maintenance of state rights, home rule, and local self-government, except where proved definitely inadequate.
9. Economical and non-political relief to unemployed with maximum local responsibility.
10. Reliance upon the American form of government and the American system of enterprise.

The effect this had on the nation’s recovery can of course never be known, as the war intervened just a few years later, but this laid a foundation that governed the post war conservative boom years. Also, sounds strikingly like the “Contract With America”, doesn’t it? Newt et al used it as a guideline.

If I’m to be condemned to wearing the red RINO “R” of shame because I voted AGAINST Obama, so be it. I still maintain that, having done all we can in the primaries to nominate solid conservatives (as I have just done, successfully!) if it gets down to a RINO vs MARXIST in the general election: An electable RINO is preferable to an unelectable conservative. And it’s time to toss some water on this conservative family feud. IMHO

Monday, September 20, 2010

A KILLER video at Real Clear Politics signals another step in the Great Unraveling. "Is THIS my new reality" is a question all of America is asking.

This is concurrent with the report from a bunch of economics knot-heads that the recession is over...ended last year, in fact.

That sure isn't reality for the lady in the video...or for the rest of America.

In politics, perceptions are reality. By some gnat-straining egg-head definition of "recession", the one Americans are STILL in may have ended last year. That has NO relevance to Americans who KNOW they are living in a diminished America...the one DESIGNED by the Obami.

Apparently, Obama is NOT the prescription anymore. (?!?!?) Wow...wha hoppened-changed?

Nor is America yearning for “empathy” from the Oval Office. People are way beyond “I feel your pain.” No one is asking for an Oprah in Chief. Anyhow, Obama is too chilly by nature ever to be convincing as a human care package.

She goes on to a brief homage (or drool) to Bill (Tina sighs) Clinton. It IS embarrassing.

But, naturally, Brown has no use for the TEA Party movement, either:

The wingnuts dominating the Tea Party movement are exploiting the just rage of a generation of Americans who feel they’ve been stiffed in the last decade. But, as Bloomberg remarked yesterday, anger is not a strategy. Palin, O’Donnell, and Co. don’t have one. They have scripts for a burlesque starring demagogues, saboteurs, and loudmouths. They are the “undoers.”

Setting aside all the BS about anger, exploitation, demagogues, saboteurs, and loudmouths (which is a good descriptive of several Congressional committees I could name), a little "UNDOING" is EXACTLY what America DOES need. It is also what it is demanding, FYI Tina-type Collectivists.

But so desperate is Tina to find some ray of hope, some direction to look for the rejuvenation of America that she turns to Michael Bloomberg? Please. With New York City as a model, Tina Brown wants THAT for America? Nannyville? The Caliphate-on-Hudson?

Brown goes on to name several other mayors she thinks are the coming thang. And maybe she's right about them being good mayors. (Maybe she is not; several of these guys are puppies.) But that isn't how you fix America, Tina. And a dose of "Bare-Knuckles" Bloomberg would be the coup-de-grace for America.

Sunday, September 19, 2010

There has been a tea-pot tempest in the blogosphere over Delaware Senatorial candidate Christine O'Donnell. Some, including Dan Riehl, seem to have appointed themselves "thought police" regarding revelations or comments from right bloggers and journalists. That is a VERY disturbing trend.

The very things that make the Journo-listers so dangerous and despicable to anyone who loves this nation OR the ideal of truthfulness OR the idea of a free press and informed electorate are in play in this little dust-up.

Apparently, Riehl (who I often admire) simply cannot abide anyone publishing anything...including facts...that he perceives as detrimental to a conservative's campaign. He immediately launches into a very personal, and often childish and profane attack on whoever transgresses his rule.

As I said it yesterday and I'm going to keep on saying, in response to this superficial, if not self-centered, view of the issue - this isn't about pundits being so called RINOs.

This isn't and never was about purity, Mary Katherine or Allahpundit. If they genuinely believe that, they should try to employ a deeper reasioning, or at least try to get over themselves. The broader composition and balance of the GOP in Washington is far more important than what any one of us thinks, or supports politically as an individual.

Like the Journo-listers, apparently Riehl expects bloggers and journalists on the right to suppress facts or opinion for "the greater good". That is outrageously wrong, and for the same reasons it was outrageously wrong for the Collectivists to do it. It is EXACTLY the same urge at work. I certainly agree with him about the good being sought, but deplore his approach to seeking it.

Yet some of our leading bloggers and pundits are on a mission to prove that they were right, and that O'Donnell was not the best pick. To that end, they regurgitate every snippet of gossip and every tape from the 1990s without context or reflection, much less waiting until the O'Donnell campaign has a chance to respond.

To the extent that is being done, and for those motives, that reeks. It can and should be deplored in writing.

But where stuff that could remotely be injurious to O'Donnell (or other candidates) is being reported by right bloggers or journalists, with context and reflection and a response (if one can be had), that is right, proper and the American way. IF it actually DOES hurt O'Donnell (or any other candidate) that is how the game is played. We cannot fear the truth...or even the facts. Nor can we ignore them. Isn't that how Obama got elected?

Which is why I have to disagree with Prof. Jacobson:

Now that the primary is over, so too is the Buckley Rule. Please take notice that the Lombardi Rule is in effect:

“The object is to win fairly, by the rules – but to win.”

So [names of conservative blogs and pundits still dumping on O'Donnell deleted], get over it and get to work defeating Democratic rubber-stamp hack Chris Coons.

Because, as Hillyer says, "[w]e are fighting for our country here."

And winning that fight in November is all that matters.

I'm going to assume that Prof. Jacobson simply said more than he meant in that last line, because it disagrees with the Lombardi rule he quoted, and with who I understand Jacobson to be. Winning in November is not all that matters. If it is, we've already lost.

Saturday, September 18, 2010

Removing any doubt about her political virtue (she's a power-whore) Murky Murkowski has put herself on the street, so to speak, trolling for Johns donors even among Deemocrats. Gotta feed that habit...!!! (h/t QandO)

Karen Knutson, Murkowski’s chief of staff, emailed scores of top lobbyists in town and employees at some of the largest oil companies – including Chevron, Conoco Phillips and Marathon Oil – to ask them to join the senator on a conference call Saturday, according to a copy of the e-mail and a recipient list obtained by POLITICO.

“To my friends in D.C. – if you are so inclined, please join us for a conference call with Lisa Murkowski tomorrow at 2:30 D.C. time and 10:30 Alaska time,” wrote Knutson. “She would love to have the chance to talk with you and answer any questions you may have. Please let me know if you intend to call in.”

But lobby money is only ONE source, and Murky will work both sides of the street (AC/DC);

Knutson also sent the invitation to Democratic superlobbyist Heather Podesta – a clue that Murkowski could seek bipartisan financial support in order to fund her write-in campaign. Federal Election Commission records show Podesta has been a consistent and generous Democratic political donor and has never given to Murkowski before.

Ugly, but strangely excellent…!

All this flushes Murky’s political proclivities out in the open (she’s a power-whore…unprincipled).

This simultaneously flushes her future as a Republican down the drain.

AND it will, with some luck, siphon off Deemocrat donor funds that might otherwise be used for something that would get the results they want. Kuhl….!!!

A common attack on the TEA Party of late...and a remarkably weak one...is that it is "anti-government". That's simply a rather stupid lie. TEA Party people are not anarchists. They are, generally, anti-BIG GOVERNMENT, or anti-Collectivists.

I don't mean to try to speak for a movement...especially an amorphous mass of people representing opinions that run across the political spectrum, but this I think is true; the trend in the TEA Party is in support of government...Constitutional government.

And, simply put, that is ESSENTIALLY different than what I call BIG GOVERNMENT...or worse, the Collective.

Nobody I've personally spoken with...no conservative I know or have met...is resentful about paying for necessary government. We deeply resent anything above that. And the vast majority of what we pay for is outside the Constitutional mandate.

Because we love people, we are not going to let them stay in want. Americans are historically the most charitable people on earth. And, for those who don't realize it, there are deep, fundamental differences between charity and a government dole. One tends to elevate everyone involved; the other is corrosive to everyone involved.

There is a broad...and irreconcilable...gulf between those who think like Barack Obama on the one hand, and those like many in the TEA Parties, on the other. Obama sees the Federal power as essentially illimitable. We see it as having the limits the Founders of the nation intended...oh, and we feel like we can read, thank you.

Since this isn't hard to comprehend, when you hear people or read something saying Taxed Enough Already (TEA) Party supporters are "anti-government" protesters who don't want to pay taxes, you can safely assume they are trying to hoodwink you. Or outright lying to you.

Friday, September 17, 2010

There was never a time in my memory when the Constitution was LESS honored than now, today, in 2010. The ruling regime of Collectivists has bald-faced told us it means nothing, if they bother consulting it at all.

IF the Obamic and Deemocrat approach is given currency by the courts, the Federal government has no limits. It can do whatever it wants, so long...apparently...as it is in vogue with the Collective. Civil rights? Depends. And for who? Well, there is that....

Can you and I be compelled to purchase...anything? Yep, according to the Collective. Can they take what you make? Of course...and consider yourself to have been very leniently dealt with if you are left with enough for your needs.

Can they then use what you made to bail out their buddies who are "too big to fail"? Done that. Will do it again in the future.

But, far from being down-fallen, I am optimistic. Americans are waking up. They will come to realize that the best hope for freedom for themselves and their families is to return to the Constitution. If it is followed, we will be a free...and prosperous people again.

Thursday, September 16, 2010

"You're either with us, or against us" is sometimes an acceptable rhetorical excess. But it is never a truthful statement. It is never a rational thing on which to insist.

For instance, George W. Bush used it just after 9/11, in the context of the terrorist Jihadist atrocity. Everyone who heard him knew what he meant. Still, human memory is such that today many Collectivists roundly criticize Booooosh for this statement, pointing to it as part of his ridiculous cowboy swagger and simplistic thinking. They forget, we suppose, that Senator Hillary Clinton used the same formula several days before Mr. Bush.

The problem is that "You're either with us, or against us" ignores reality, and it ignores human nature. Which, I assert, is dumb for us to do.

Human beings are not binary creatures. We are pretty much NEVER EITHER "on or off" on anything. We may be VERY strongly one thing or another, but we are always a hodge-podge of conflicting feelings, thoughts, etc. On a host of things, we may be rather indifferent.

Virtually always, people on any given question will fall out somewhere on a bell curve. It was true in the American Revolution with respect to the question, "Shall we remain loyal, or shall we form a new nation?" Some were for loyalty to the Crown, some were Revolutionaries, and the vast middle was some degree of indifferent. Even a lot of the "kinda Revolutionary" people were conflicted. Pick your historical question; in pretty much every situation, you'll be able to apply the bell curve to human beings being human.

Just now, there seems to be a lot of very loud insistence that we ignore the bell curve of humanity, which is dumb. With respect to Islam, I am hearing and reading a lot of stuff insisting that Muslims prove to us that they are "moderate" (or do not support Islamism), down on the individual level. They have to go out in the street, essentially, and make it their life's work. It isn't a wrong thing to want; it's just silly. It isn't remotely going to happen under any circumstance because of the bell curve.

For the vast middle of the bell curve, Muslims world-wide are not with us or against us. They essentially don't care enough either way. Even many of those that might harbor some animosity toward us just don't feel strongly enough to do us any harm. Here is where we have an opportunity...good or bad. We MUST appreciate that we are in a battle MOSTLY for the bell curve. There are stupid, wrong things we can do to shift the vast middle against us, and there are intelligent, right things we can do to shift the middle towards us. A little shift means MILLIONS of potential enemies or "not enemies".

The same holds true with a lot of rhetoric I am hearing in the political fray. Even among people who see themselves as conservatives, there's a lot of "With us or..." nonsense being thrown around. We have to bear in mind, those of us that are "true believers", this is ALWAYS about PR...ALWAYS about a message that can be successful at moving the vast middle of the bell curve toward us. That does not mean...EVER...we surrender anything; it means we find ways to show people who we are, what we believe, and that those a good enough to move them out of indifference toward us. It also means we don't alienate our friends near us on the bell curve with excessive rhetoric.

Honoring human nature is always a wise course. Remembering that humans are NOT binary things, but things that fall out in almost any case on a bell curve, with the vast majority of the population being indifferent...that is wise. It gives you a "reality tool".

Tuesday, September 14, 2010

Far and away, the most powerful book I have read is “Lone Survivor” by Marcus Luttrell. I bought it in ’08 in Denver for a read on the flight home. I read it in the taxi, read standing in lines at the airport, read on the plane, read waiting for my luggage, read at stoplights driving home, then sat up all night and finished it just in time for coffee in the morning. This big dumb Swede does not come to tears easily, but I literally wept. If you’ve not yet read it, please - you must. Genuine Heroes are truly scarce in our synthetic, veracity challenged culture but you need look no further than Marcus Luttrell. He is the real deal.

“A graduate of BUD/S Class 228, he was the only survivor of the fateful events of June 28, 2005 in Afghanistan. Luttrell and three teammates from SEAL Team TEN were assigned to a reconnaissance mission, operation RED WING, in the Hindu-Kush mountain region of Afghanistan. Their objective was to gather intelligence on Taliban movement in the area, and if possible take out the Taliban leader. Luttrell’s team was eventually discovered and outnumbered by over 200 Taliban fighters. Petty Officer Luttrell was the only one to survive enemy contact. In the rescue mission that ensued, 16 Special Forces personnel, including 8 more SEALs, died when their helicopter was shot down by Taliban fighters. It was the largest single-day loss of life in the SEALs’ history.”Before going down, just four SEALs - Luttrell, Dietz, Axleson and Murphy dispatched 100 Taliban to meet Allah that day. Luttrell was awarded the Navy Cross for combat heroism – but he won’t wear it. “People say we’re heroes. We’re not heroes, we’re patriots. We love America. That’s why we do what we do.”Several things brought Marcus to mind today. First, the sheer irresponsibility, irrelevance, ignorance and bias of our “news” media, vis-à-vis most recently the Koran Kook fiasco – and a line from Luttrell in the NRA clip below. In his best Texas country boy prose: “The thing that aggravates me the most about what happens to y’all as the American public is the information you get from the media...It’s so frustrating! You know, it’s like my doctor says, ‘Son, you have PTSD.’ I’m like, the only PTSD I have is when I wake up and turn the TV on, and watch those newscasters put out something that IS NOT RIGHT!”

Second, I am just soul weary of weenie LIBERALS who couldn’t lead a poodle on a leash holding “leadership” positions in the greatest…no, damn it, the most EXCEPTIONAL nation that has ever – or will ever exist.

And finally, I am even more weary of the “doom and gloom/we’re soooo screwed/it’s aall over” CONSERVATIVES whining instead of mobilizing. I suggest we all need to put a sock in it and listen to someone who "doesn't have much time for words."Luttrell’s speech to the NRA - May,2008:

Final note. The Navy SEALs are arguably the most specialized, most advanced, best equipped, best educated and best trained Special Operations force in history – but are constrained by “Rules of Engagement” thought up by empty suits who have never in their lives heard a shot fired in anger. Luttrell is convinced this is what cost the lives of SEAL Team 10 and 16 other Special Forces on that damned mountain.

Luttrell: "We know about bad guys, what they do, and who they are. The politicians have chosen to send us into battle, and that's our trade. We do what's necessary. And in my view, once those politicians have elected to send us out to do what 99.9 percent of the country would be terrified to undertake, they should get the hell out of the way and stay there.”

How can you argue with that? Try to imagine what it must be like to be in harms way with a Commander in Chief and Congress who have no clue why we are fighting or who the enemy is. I pray for them each morning. Pray for them now:

Almighty God, Ancient of Days, Mighty One, please guide, protect and prosper our warriors who must fight in far off lands for our freedom and security. Their cause is just and their hearts are right.And Lord, please hear their prayer:

Monday, September 13, 2010

An addendum to Rags' piece - All you really didn't want to know about Rev. Terry Jones, but can not avoid because the creepy crapweasel is plastered up everywhere from Drudge to HuffPo to Fox to MSNBC. The Smoking Gun turned up a document much more appropriate for Jones and his Dove World Outreach Center weinie roast. The “DWOC Academy Rulebook.” Here we have an outstanding academy for advanced idiocy. Some exerpts from the intro:

“The Goal of the Academy is for each student to develop a stabile[sic] lifestyle of Discipline in order to become a strong apostolic Fife[sic] Fold Minister in our Apostolic Ministry System… There are 9 Categories we have set a standard[sic] the student has to follow.”

Fractured syntax, spelling, case and tortured grammar aside – I found some personal hygene standards on page 6 that would have been welcome in my college dorm wing (the odor haunts me to this day)…

* Clothe[sic] must be cleaned and ironed as practiced.
* Students are not supposed to take off the uniform during there[sic] working and service time in exchange with[sic] separate clothe.[sic] Exceptions only after receiving permission.
* Wash or shower at least once a day but not more than 2 [sic] a day…
* Mouth, sweat areas, hair, feet hands, [sic – very, very sick]

Fun facts about the Reverend “Dr.” Terry Jones and Dove World Outreach:

* Former motel manager.
* “Honorary” Doctor of Ministry diploma from California Graduate School of Theology – an obscure non–accredited institution. He never took a class. They dissavow him.
* Started a church in Germany in the ‘80s but was removed and deported. “Personality conflicts” – don’tcha know.
* Took over DWOC (independent pentecostal group) when the founding pastor died
* His congregation totals about 50, with +/- 30 in attendance on Sunday
* He has almost 70 friends on Facebook
* He was cited and fined by the IRS for running a furniture business from his 501(c)(3) church.
* He owns a vacation home on Treasure Island near Tampa (I used to live near there - this is top dollar real estate), another home in Panama City, several SUV's and boats.
* Their building is a pre-fab steel frame – cheapest building that Florida code allows. Suitable for use as a church, warehouse or barn.
* TOTUS, Petreaus and Muslims across the world are in a tizzy over this fruitcake.

With all the Christian charity and good will I can muster – what we have here is a raving idiot, a charlatan, a cretin and an attention whore in a cheap, ancient polyester suit with a patently un-Christian, unscriptural message - and the media is eating him up with a spoon large enough to gag an Orca. Every Christian group in the country (except good ol’ Fred Phelps and the funky folks at Westboro Baptist) detest and denounce him. Jones rather reminds me of another Rev. Jones. Yeah, you remember. Thank God this Jones doesn't have the charisma to draw large numbers of followers.

But all this is not really Jones' fault - you can't cure stupid. He's just a dope with an opinion.It is the media that has elevated him to celeb status, given him a world stage and painted him as somehow representative of some larger movement. (Christians are worse than al Qaida, or something).This is deplorable, despicable and grossly irresponsible. He's just an idiot. They should know better.